1. The first instance judgment, including any claims modified and added by this Court, shall be amended as follows:

2. The plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. From August 17, 2012, the Plaintiff has worked as the president of C institution (hereinafter “C institution”) from around August 17, 2012, and the Defendant has comprehensively succeeded to the rights and duties and property of C institution in accordance with the “B institution Establishment and Management Act” on February 4, 2017.

B. On December 24, 2014, the board of directors of the 8th C Agency decided on a request for dismissal of the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant request for dismissal”) from the Plaintiff on the same ground as indicated in the “request for dismissal” attached Form, and requested the Minister of Food and Drug Safety, who is the head of the competent agency (hereinafter “the Minister of Food and Drug Safety”), to dismiss the Plaintiff.

C. On December 24, 2014, the Minister of Food and Drug Management accepted the request of the society of C institutions’ society, and issued a dismissal disposition against the Plaintiff based on Article 35(3) of the Act on the Management of Public Institutions (hereinafter “instant dismissal disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 43 evidence, Eul evidence 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking the revocation of the instant dismissal disposition and won the lawsuit.

B. In addition, the preparation and resolution of the instant request for dismissal and the instant dismissal disposition are null and void due to a serious and obvious defect as seen below.

1) The reasons for proposing the dismissal request presented in the instant request for dismissal are the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (hereinafter “Food and Drug Administration”).

2) Despite the board of directors of C institution, the food and drug wife without authority prepared a request for dismissal of the Plaintiff and made a resolution at the board of directors of C institution.

3) Although the Director does not have the authority to audit the C Institution, he conducted an illegal audit on the C Institution without the authority to audit the C Institution, thereby obstructing C Institution’s business by deceptive means or by force. 4) The Managing Director of the C Institution’s request for the dismissal of the Plaintiff.